140 likes | 300 Views
Treasurer. Paul Andersen. Summary. 2011 Draft Financial Results 2012 Q1 Unaudited Results Reserves Fees. Financial Results 2011 Draft Audit – pre Board Adaption. 2011 – Through December 31st Registration Revenue $14,366,665 IPv4 Registrations = $10,393,759
E N D
Treasurer Paul Andersen
Summary • 2011 Draft Financial Results • 2012 Q1 Unaudited Results • Reserves • Fees
Financial Results 2011Draft Audit – pre Board Adaption • 2011 – Through December 31st • Registration Revenue $14,366,665 • IPv4 Registrations = $10,393,759 • All Other = $ 3,972,971 • 2011 Expenses $15,062,078 • Operating Result ($ 695,423) • 2011 Investment Result ($ 355,211) • Net to Reserves ($1,016,951)
Financial Results 1st Qtr. 2012 • 2012 – through March 31st • Registration Revenue $3,666,318 • IPv4 Registrations = $2,773,500 • All Other = $ 838,845 • 2012 Expenses $3,589,658 • Operating Result $ 76,660 • 2012 Investment Result $1,865,799 • Net to Reserves $1,942,459
Investment Return HistoryThe Net Investment Gain Since 2000 is $10,700,000
Reserve Policy • ARIN is to keep 1 to 2 years of operating expenses in reserve • Currently at 1.5 of operating expense • 2012 budget = 16.92 Million • Current Reserve = 24.65 Million • Board would like management to draw reserves down to one year • Last 3 years budgets have called for a reserve draw
Fee Discussion • Current Fees were established at ARIN’s inception in 1997 • IPv4 & IPv6 Allocations – recurring renewal fees annually • IPv4 & IPv6 Assignments – initial fee, then minimal maintenance fee Autonomous System Numbers - $500 initial fee, then minimal maintenance fee • Other fees – transfers, membership, conference fees
The Goals of a New Fee Structure • Equitable Fees based on costs • Avoid creating disincentives for adoption of industry-wide initiatives • Target a smaller ARIN based on long- term post-IPv4-runout expenses • Maintain and reduce where possible costs for smaller Internet organizations • Promote open membership structure for those with bona fide interest
Questions with Current Structure • Is the $100 maintenance fee paid by end-users for registration services for any number of IPv4 address blocks of any size equitable and fair? • ISPs pay much more annually for the registry services despite very similar services and workload • IPv6 registry services fees are the same for end-users & ISPs • Should we focus on “fee per block” (which best reflects costs) or relative “fee per IPv4 address/IPv6 network” or somewhere in between? • Should paid membership (including vote) be available for interested parties which do not holder number resources?
Timeline • Board Strategic Discussion on fee issues • August 2011 and January 2012 • Staff review of fee goals and issues • April 2012 • Board request for input from membership • Today • FinCom & Board consideration towards initial draft • July & August 2012 • Request for feedback on proposed changes • September 2012 • Final Presentation to community • October Member Meeting 2012 • Target effective date of January 1, 2013